packaging ROS bfl

[Johannes Schauer]

Hi,

Quoting Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda (2016-10-19 09:52:32)
> orocos-bfl is packaged (not perfect), but not officially. See:
> 
> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/debian-science/packages/orocos/bfl.git/
> 
> The project is not dead, but AFAIK upstream is the orocos team, specially 
> Klaas Gadeyne. However, I guess that is not very active.

I see. This is the upstream packaging with only very minor modifications by
Jochen (liblti-dev is not packaged yet either, so it got removed from B-D).

> PS you know that you are _always_ welcome to contribute to the Robotic
> packages ;-)

Thanks! I will then use this git repository to push my changes.

This also answers the question which bfl version you deem more packaging
worthy.

The question remains, what to do about the different naming bfl (ROS) versus
orocos-bfl (upstream). Probably ROS packages using it would have to try
detecting one of them with cmake and fall back onto the other if it wasn't
found.

Thanks!

cheers, josch
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-science-maintainers/attachments/20161019/18e042f8/attachment.sig>